Confronting Disinformation: Journalists and the Conflict over Truth in #Elxn43 Chris Tenove and Stephanie MacLellan PRE-PRINT of chapter in: Cyber-Threats to Canadian Democracy, ed. by Holly Ann Garnett and Michael Pal. McGill-Queen’s University Press. Introduction There is widespread concern that online disinformation threatens democracy, and in particular the integrity of democratic elections. This concern has been stoked by evidence that both foreign and domestic actors have used a range of techniques to promote false or deceptive content during electoral campaigns, most prominently during the United States election and the United Kingdom’s Brexit referendum in 2016 (Communications Security Establishment 2017; Bayer et al. 2019; U.S. Senate 2019). In the run-up to the 2019 federal election in Canada, experts and policymakers raised the possibility that foreign or domestic actors might use disinformation tactics during the campaign. This prompted Canadian journalists to give unprecedented attention to threats that online disinformation might pose to the information ecosystem and thus to electoral integrity. Journalism organizations have long performed a gatekeeper function: they select and disseminate to the public some but not all information, or information from some but not all sources (Vos 2019). As a result, they play an important role in shaping public discourse during election campaigns (Druckman 2005; McCombs 2014).1 As such, they may be better positioned 1 We use the terms “journalism organizations,” “news organizations” and “news outlets” interchangeably, to refer to public and private news media organizations that broadly adhere to journalism professional 1 than other institutions to help the public identify disinformation, and understand the motives and mechanisms behind it. Furthermore, they may play a critical role in informing the public about other cyber-threats to electoral integrity, including cyber-security breaches of political parties or electoral management bodies. However, journalism organizations have at times had their own reporting practices “hacked” by disinformation actors, leading them to accidentally amplify the reach or impact of disinformation campaigns (Lukito et al. 2020; Phillips 2018; Wardle 2018). Moreover, the rise of online disinformation has come at a time when the journalism field itself is disrupted by threats to its economic viability, its gatekeeping function, and its perceived legitimacy. This chapter analyzes how Canadian journalists understood and responded to disinformation in the 2019 federal election campaign. (The election was often referred to on social media with the hashtag #elxn43, because it was Canada’s 43rd federal election). We address three research questions: What do journalists identify as forms of disinformation that threaten the quality of public debate during an election campaign? How do journalists believe they should respond to disinformation? What lessons can be drawn from instances of disinformation present in the 2019 election campaign, and from journalism organizations’ responses to them? The chapter proceeds as follows. We first describe the context for journalists’ attention to online disinformation as one form of cyber-threat to the integrity of the 2019 election. We next review communication and journalism scholarship on contributions that journalism can make to the democratic quality of elections, and the challenges posed by disinformation actors and by norms. Defining what counts as a journalism organization is contested, and as noted below this became an issue during the 2019 Canadian election campaign (Loriggio 2019). 2 upheaval in the media system. We then explain our methodological approach, the analysis of in- depth interviews with more than 30 journalists, conducted before and after the 2019 election campaign. The next section presents our findings on the first research question. In brief, while interviewees had competing conceptions of disinformation and the appropriate responses by journalists, most associated it with digitally enabled techniques of media manipulation (e.g. the use of automated social media accounts known as “bots”) pursued by both traditional and newly prominent actors (including foreign states, partisan organizations and loose networks of domestic trolls). To address online disinformation, some journalism organizations developed new reporting approaches and teams, while many journalists and senior editors reflected on how longstanding reporting practices may or may not address this new challenge. We then investigate key challenges that journalists face in countering disinformation by examining three illustrative cases from the 2019 campaign: the alleged role of bots and foreign accounts in online discourse; the salacious rumours about incumbent prime minister Justin Trudeau pushed by foreign and domestic actors, including the U.S.-based website The Buffalo Chronicle; and the potential for leaks of illegally acquired material acquired through hacking operations. Reflecting on disinformation in #elxn43, journalists described three general challenges. Two are relatively new: how to identify novel and sophisticated online disinformation tactics, and how to address disinformation without amplifying its spread on social media. The third is a dilemmas that journalists have long faced in election reporting: how to report on misleading claims in a context of intense partisan competition, when journalists themselves are being scrutinized as actors in the political fray. 3 Context: Disinformation as a Threat to Canada’s Election Integrity Concern that disinformation threatens electoral integrity has increased dramatically in recent years, with evidence of foreign state-sponsored and domestic campaigns of deceptive communication preceding elections in countries including France, Germany, Kenya, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, and the United States (Communications Security Establishment 2017; Bayer et al. 2019; Tenove 2020). In particular, the 2016 U.S. election campaign revealed the many tactics that actors could use to undermine the quality of information and political discussion (U.S. Senate 2019). Disinformation in elections is not new. However, actors now use new tactics of digital disinformation, which take advantage of vulnerabilities in information systems that have undergone dramatic upheaval in an era of social media platforms (Miller and Vaccari 2020; McKay and Tenove 2020). As we further explain below, one aspect of this upheaval is that journalism organizations play a reduced role as information gatekeepers (Vos 2019). For instance, during the Cold War, Soviet attempts to infiltrate the public discourse were routinely weeded out by professional journalists and editors who “thoroughly vetted stories before publication” (Deeks, McCubbin, and Poplin 2017). Now social media itself has become an important source of news, with platforms allowing any and all users to post links to news stories, comment on current events, and even stream live video of breaking news events (Posetti 2018). Election candidates, hate groups, foreign adversaries, and engaged citizens all have new opportunities to communicate more directly, without intermediation by journalists. In addition to the overt distribution of information, foreign states and other potentially adversarial actors engage in many forms of covert strategic communications (Bradshaw and Howard 2018). For instance, the Kremlin-linked Internet Research Agency (IRA), the so-called 4 “troll factory” that carried out disinformation campaigns in the 2016 U.S. election, created social media accounts that posed as Americans. Doing so enabled them to distort the information environment by making foreign-planted or foreign-amplified opinions look more prevalent than they really were, and to sow distrust among social groups or toward democratic institutions (U.S. Senate 2019). As a result of these and other activities, polling suggests that audiences have difficulty differentiating between reliable news and false information. For instance, an Edelman Trust Barometer global survey (2018) found that 63% of people do not believe the average person can tell the difference between legitimate journalism and rumours, while 59% say it is becoming more difficult to tell if a news item was produced by a respected media organization. The threat of disinformation for #elxn43 The Canadian government, experts, and journalists warned that the 2019 federal election could be targeted by online disinformation operations. In April 2019, Canada’s signals intelligence agency, the Communications Security Establishment (2019, 5), issued a report stating it was “very likely that Canadian voters will encounter some form of foreign cyber interference related to the 2019 federal election.” The CSE explained that foreign actors may “target the democratic process to change Canadian election outcomes, policy makers’ choices, governmental relationships with foreign and domestic partners, and Canada’s reputation around the world” (9). This interference would likely entail attempts to manipulate voters, political parties, and journalists via information operations, the CSE declared, because Canada’s paper- based federal voting processes are themselves deemed secure (Communications Security Establishment 2017). 5 Prior to the 2019 election, there were indications that foreign actors were using disinformation tactics to influence the Canadian public. Evidence emerged in 2018 suggesting that Canadian audiences were targeted